Implementation Of Procedural Justice In Law Enforcement

The criminal justice system is effective in achieving justice, in relations to police power and authority. Police are tasked with an essential role in protecting and enforcing the law. They are a critical aspect towards the criminal justice system and the criminal investigation process. To assist their role to the community, they’ve been provided several types of powers and authorities to achieve their duties towards the community. These authorised powers are used to stop, search and detain a person when they’re certain a crime is committed. Consequently, police can use this authority to potentially violate another individuals’ right, such as privacy. Whilst this power allows police to fulfil their duty to the community, is that justifiable to violate an individuals’ right?

The criminal justice system consists of models and theories that often contradict one another. Of these models are the crime control model, the due process, model, the consensus model and the conflict model. In this paper these models are evaluated and defined, as well as each entity in the criminal justice systems role within each model. Policing, corrections and the court system all subscribe to each model in some way and in a hurried manner in cases that dictate such a response. As described by Erik Luna in the Models of Criminal Procedure, the following statement summarizes the aforementioned most appropriately.

Within the criminal justice system discuss the effectiveness of legal and non-legal measures in achieving justice.

Justice is defined in law enforcement in many different and accurate ways. Justice is inevitable and controversial when defining it in terms of law enforcement. Law enforcement is challenged in every possible way as the

Procedural Justice Theory basis itself on the perception of respect and fairness for the offender, thus, the reason why conferences are used, they emphasise communication and offer support to both, the offender and the victim.

Discretion in policing and the court system is a necessary and unavoidable facet of criminal justice work, yet it is still very controversial. Discretion exists when courtroom actors (police officers, attorneys, judges) have the flexibility to choose an appropriate response to a situation. Police discretion is defined as “The opportunity of law enforcement officers to exercise choice in their daily activities” (Nowacki, 2015). This means that actors with a great deal of discretion at their disposal may allow biases to affect their decision-making. These decisions lead to important implications throughout the criminal justice process, especially in the courtroom. The process begins with the decision to arrest by a law enforcement officer in the field. Once the case is forwarded to the prosecuting attorney, multifarious avenues of discretionary decisions are available to resolve a case. Potential issues that could arise and that are ever-present in everyday policing include racism, sexism and socialism (Miller, 2015). These issues ultimately have a negative affect on the criminal justice process, leading civilians to not trust the one process and actors that are there to help them. While discretion should play a role in the actions a courtroom actor takes and cannot be eliminated entirely, instead it should be limited and controlled throughout the criminal justice environment so that citizens can once again trust the process and so that there will be no disparities.

When one thinks of police misconduct many not too distant stories might go through our heads. Most adults will remember how they felt when they saw the brutal beating of Rodney King on their local news station; or the outrage they experienced when they heard that the evidence in the OJ Simpson trial had been tampered with. But thanks to new guidelines, procedures and even civilian groups who now “police” the police, instances of police misconduct may soon start seeing a decline.

7) The need to be in constant emotional control. Law enforcement officers have a job that requires extreme restraint under highly emotional circumstances. They are told when they are extremely excited, they have to act calm. They are told when they are nervous, they have to be in charge. They are taught to be stoic when emotional. They are to interact with the world in a role. The emotional constraint of the role takes tremendous mental energy, much more energy than expressing true emotions. When the energy drain is very strong, it may make the officer more prone to exhaustion outside of work, such as not wanting to participate in social or family life. This energy drain can also create a sense of job and social burnout.

Police executives have always had different issues within the police department. Most police executives try to find a quick fix in order to solve the issue of police misconduct. Police misconduct is defined as inappropriate action taken by police officers in relation with their official duties (Police Misconduct Law & Legal Definition, n.d.). In order to solve this issue, one must acknowledge their different challenges, overcome the “code of silence”, and find out the role of organizational culture.

It is through the Criminal Justice System’s close collaborations with like-minded agencies such as the Police, Prison and Courts Services, that the public’s concerns and worries are resolved, in order to bring about justice in our communities (Cavadino and Dignan, 2007 as cited in Fox, 2014). With that in mind and out of the way, this essay will aim to explore some of the strengths and weaknesses, which are prominent within the Criminal Justice System. To do this successfully, the Police and the Courts Service will be the key agencies that will be explored in relation to the key Models that shape the whole Criminal Justice System. These Models were founded by Herbert L. Packer (1968) and Michael King (1981).

The authors confirm that there exists evidence supporting the fact that many criminal justice processes are unfair and could be described as biased, subjective, inequitable, serving financial morals and grows out of the criminal law. They also conclude from the study that the myth on the criminal justice system being fair is not true from the law making department down to the correctional department.

Looking into criminal justice procedure, many administrations are at work. Starting with the police, to the courts and concluding in corrections. Though all these sectors have different tasks, their combined focus is processing the law. Regardless what the process is called criminal justice will continue to serve with discretion, conviction, and correction. When first presented with the question whether criminal justice is a system, non-system, and network I leaned toward a network. Throughout our discussions, lectures, and readings I felt the process presented itself as a network. Intertwined divisions working for a common goal. Further into my research and help from Webster, I decided that the criminal justice

Organizational stress affects many officers but is not as obvious as other stressors that take place. Police departments vary in size and resources, in spite of this, most organizational structures of departments follow a hierachial bureaucracy. Organizational stressors may include

Unreasonable deadlines or extreme time pressure, sometimes management can give employees numerous works in the morning and want it back by the end of the day. You can get so overwhelm because of the time pressure you become stress and can make mistake that can cause the company.

Although rationality does not always exist, much of the functioning of criminal justice agencies is unplanned, poorly coordinated, and unregulated. Existing systems include some components that are very ancient, additionally each of the institutions have their own set of goals and priorities that sometimes conflict with those of other institutions, or with the goals and priorities of the system as a whole. Furthermore, each of these institutions have substantial unregulated discretion in making particular decisions such as the victim's decision to report a crime (Frase & Weidner).